Commonwealth v. Petetabella, 459 Mass. 177

Background

Jean Thibeault was shot and killed during a December 1963 bar robbery in Fall River; defendant and two others were convicted of murder and related offenses in 1964 and sentenced to life, with the death penalty recommended not imposed.
The defendant did not appeal his murder conviction; nearly 44 years later, he filed a motion for a new trial under Mass. R. Crim. R. 30 (b) as a collateral attack.
The motion judge denied an amended motion for a new trial after an evidentiary hearing; the defendant appealed, and the case was treated as an appeal from collateral attack on the final conviction.
The motion included claims that trial counsel misadvised him about appealing, and that various trial errors and structural defects affected the proceedings.
The court held the matter was a collateral attack, not a direct appeal, and affirm the denial of the motion for a new trial as not manifestly unjust or prejudicial.
Key topics at trial and on motion included: insanity/intoxication defenses, testimony by the defendant, and several alleged structural errors in jury instruction and trial procedure.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the appeal is properly a collateral attack on a final conviction.	Thibeault contends direct appeal procedures should apply.	Waiver and strategic decision by counsel support collateral review.	Appeal proper as collateral attack; not a direct appeal.
Whether failure to appeal due to counsel’s advice was a knowing, voluntary waiver.	Waiver was ineffective assistance; not knowingly voluntary.	Counsel advised not to appeal to avoid death penalty risk; waiver valid.	Waiver by counsel’s advice was knowingly voluntary; no ineffective assistance.
Whether asserted structural errors (presumption instruction, female juror exclusion, shackling, noise) require reversal.	Errors are structural and require new trial.	No structural error; issues either waived or harmless.	No reversible structural error; any missteps were harmless or not structural.
Whether Sandstrom-type or burden-shifting errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.	Improper burden-shifting instruction may have affected verdict.	Any Sandstrom error is retroactivity-dependent and harmless here.	Harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; no reversal.

Key Cases Cited

Commonwealth v. Lopez, 426 Mass. 657 (1998) (collateral-review standards; defer to motion judge's credibility findings)
Commonwealth v. Russin, 420 Mass. 309 (1995) (standard for appellate review of collateral attacks)
Commonwealth v. Grace, 397 Mass. 303 (1986) (deference to trial judge on credibility; trial record review)
Sattazahn v. Pennsylvania, 537 U.S. 101 (2003) (double jeopardy and retrial after death-penalty acquittal)
Bullington v. Missouri, 451 U.S. 430 (1981) (double jeopardy constraints on retrial prior to Sandstrom)
Arizona v. Rumsey, 467 U.S. 203 (1984) (double jeopardy limits on retrial after death-penalty issues)
Stroud v. United States, 251 U.S. 17 (1919) (pre-Teague context on death-penalty retrial)
Makarewicz v. Commonwealth, 346 Mass. 478 (1963) (early mass rulings on double jeopardy and retrial)
Arsenault v. Commonwealth, 361 Mass. 287 (1972) (Mass. standard on collateral attacks and manifest injustice)
Commonwealth v. Saferian, 366 Mass. 89 (1974) (standard for evaluating ineffective assistance of counsel in MA)
Commonwealth v. Nolin, 448 Mass. 207 (2007) (harmless-error standard for improper jury instruction)
Yates v. Evatt, 500 U.S. 391 (1991) (probative value of evidence relative to presumptions)
Commonwealth v. Medina, 430 Mass. 800 (2000) (retroactivity and Sandstrom-type errors; evidentiary weighing)
Commonwealth v. Waite, 422 Mass. 792 (1996) (intoxication and burden of proof; malice implications)
Commonwealth v. Cundriff, 382 Mass. 137 (1980) (finding language and burden placement in instructions)
Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510 (1979) (mandatory presumption instruction invalid)
Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989) (retroactivity framework adopted in Massachusetts)
Commonwealth v. Bray, 407 Mass. 296 (1990) (retroactivity of Sandstrom under Teague framework)
Deck v. Missouri, 544 U.S. 622 (2005) (capital-case restraints on shackles; discretionary balancing)